Why IE7 behaves like this ?

Hello Frnds, we are developing application in STRUTS... we r using struts-tiles for this. Now my prob is, when i m giving URL : ../activity.do for IE6 n NS8 it comes back to one folder ../ bt for IE7 it comes out to the root folder... i also tried /activity.do which may brings us to root

Re: [tiles] Tiles 2 DTD

Hello again, I'm back! I'm somewhat intrigued by Antonio's IoC for the view message a couple of days ago. If we start to push Tiles in that direction it may also affect the DTD. There is also a ticket issue for nested definitions that will affect the DTD:

Re: Why IE7 behaves like this ?

yogesh ha scritto: or is it a bug with IE7 as it is working fine with IE6, NS8 n Mozilla FireFox I think you answered yourself :-) This seems like a bug in IE7 Ciao Antonio - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For

Re: Why IE7 behaves like this ?

Hi Antonio, ya, I think its a bug with IE7. bt is ther any way to overcome to this ? coz we dont knw which browser client will use. thx 4 ur prompt reply waiting 2 hear 4m u. : ) - Posted via Jive Forums

[OT] Re: Why IE7 behaves like this ?

I forgot to tell you to post this kind of questions in Struts Users mailing lists http://struts.apache.org/mail.html And this question seems to be OT, so I marked it this way. yogesh ha scritto: Hi Antonio, ya, I think its a bug with IE7. bt is ther any way to overcome to this ? coz we dont

Re: [s2] Freemarker transform name

I updated that, and the velocity prefix, yesterday. (Check out your Hangman example!) The next biggest task is following up with the taglib proposal. (Starting with refreshing the TLD file from the WW head.) We should also update the Showcase example so that they do not use the ! alias syntax.

Re: Why IE7 behaves like this with STRUTS-TILES?

This problem is arised with only IE7, as IE7 is still in beta version. so time to post this bug with microsoft. Thx to Antonio !!! : ) - Posted via Jive Forums

Why Back Button pertube an Action ?

Hello , I search a lot but i don't find so i write to you. If you have experience this problem , thank for your help I have a problem with Back Button of the navigator with a Struts application : When i make an action A (who forward to a jsp where i a have B anb C action). If I make B (who

Re: [s2] Freemarker transform name

I updated that, and the velocity prefix, yesterday. Ah... Ok.. cheers Ted. Looks like I am a bit out dated. :-) For the validator framework, is the Classname-alias-validation.xml syntax working? Yes, i believe it is. The next biggest task is following up with the taglib proposal.

Re: [s2] Freemarker transform name

Ted, I'm still not yet on board with removing the ! syntax until we have a solid replacement. I don't think pointing to wildcards is enough, especially since you would have to create a wildcard for every namespace. That is more configuration than I'm willing to recommend to our users. I would,

Re: Why Back Button pertube an Action ?

On 8/21/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hello , I search a lot but i don't find so i write to you. Please use Struts Users Mailing List (user@struts.apache.org) for questions. If you want to reply, please do so to the user list. If you have experience this problem , thank for

Re: [s1] Commons-Lang

I think we should keep s2's dependencies down to an absolute minimum. If you are writing an application, the more you reuse third-party libraries the better, however, if you are writing a framework and/or library, ideally, you should have none. The main reason libraries should have as few

[s2] Action ! Method syntax (was Freemarker transform name)

Ok, this issue breaks down like this in my mind: 1. Should our tags (url, form, etc) have attributes for the namespace, action, and method, or just have one for the url? 2. Should our default ActionMapper allow the method to be specified in the url? Issue #1 goes back to the more fundamental

Wildcarding the Bang (was Re: [s2] Freemarker transform name0

On 8/21/06, Patrick Lightbody [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm still not yet on board with removing the ! syntax until we have a solid replacement. I don't think pointing to wildcards is enough, especially since you would have to create a wildcard for every namespace. Right now, the ! idiom is

Re: [s2] Action ! Method syntax (was Freemarker transform name)

On 8/21/06, Don Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I know that the overriding concern is security. Here's the thing. Regardless of what we think, there are independant security organizations that review security issues for high profile frameworks. If we don't control the bang with a switch that

Re: [s2] Action ! Method syntax (was Freemarker transform name)

On 8/21/06, Ted Husted [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I know that the overriding concern is security. Oops, that was Patrick speaking, not Don. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL

Re: [s2] Action ! Method syntax (was Freemarker transform name)

Sure, I agree with all of that. And I've said I'm opening to nailing this down more with conventions and/or annotations. I'm even open to a switch to turn it off. What I'm not open to is just removing/deprecating it entirely without addressing the fact that it is _widely_ used in a ton of

Re: [s2] Action ! Method syntax (was Freemarker transform name)

On 8/21/06, Don Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I think we should remove the method and namespace attributes on the tags and elevate the status of the URL in Struts 2. /s/Struts 2/Struts 3/ For Struts 2, I think we should go with pretty much what we got. All of these ideas are both

Re: [s2] Action ! Method syntax (was Freemarker transform name)

On 8/21/06, Patrick Lightbody [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Sure, I agree with all of that. And I've said I'm opening to nailing this down more with conventions and/or annotations. I'm even open to a switch to turn it off. Which is where we are, right now, today. So let's dig deep and get to a

PerformInclude

Why does PerformInclude perform a forward on the RequestDispatcher, but not an include? - Get your email and more, right on the new Yahoo.com

Re: [s2] Action ! Method syntax (was Freemarker transform name)

OK, that all sounds good. My only request would be then: can we un-deprecate the ! syntax and keep it on (by default), while still giving the option to turn it off and perhaps set up a Security conscience page on the wiki that catalogs all these switches? On 8/21/06, Patrick Lightbody [EMAIL

Re: [s2] Action ! Method syntax (was Freemarker transform name)

On 8/21/06, Patrick Lightbody [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: OK, that all sounds good. My only request would be then: can we un-deprecate the ! syntax and keep it on (by default), while still giving the option to turn it off and perhaps set up a Security conscience page on the wiki that catalogs

Re: [s2] Action ! Method syntax (was Freemarker transform name)

I guess why I don't like this mentality is that we have these kinds of security holes all over the place. If you expose getters or setters that are unsafe in your action or _any_ of your model objects, you can get that problem. The fact is that with dynamic reflection that is controlled by URL

Re: [s1] Commons-Lang

On 8/21/06, Don Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I think we should keep s2's dependencies down to an absolute minimum. If you are writing an application, the more you reuse third-party libraries the better, however, if you are writing a framework and/or library, ideally, you should have none.

Re: [s1] Commons-Lang

Commons Logging is a great example of the problems these small third-party dependencies cause host applications :) In this case, yes, we need to log, however, as a library, the only messages the user will care about are those that are from the library as a whole. If the user needs to filter at